Aftermarket Zeiss lens on my T1i, will it make a difference?

[JMapleton]

I just bought a Canon T1i kit, which included the 18-55mm IS Zoom lens.

I'm looking at aftermarket lenses, particularly a Zeiss 50mm:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...Planar_ZE.html

What sort of difference in the image quality will I see with a lens like this? What things will be different? Smoothness of image? Sharpness? Color?

 

[repoman0]

If you don't know what the difference will be you don't need to drop over $1k on a lens like that. The 18-55mm IS is very good for the price. If you want a large aperture prime lens, grab the Canon 50mm II f/1.8 for $100 and call it a day for a while. They have high resale value too ($80-$90) if you decide you want something better.

 

[Adul]

Perhaps I would take time to master what you have before dropping a lot of money on good equipment. There is the rental route you can go with like lensrentals.com And for a crop frame I would look at a 35mm lens to get the equivalent 50mm of a full frame.

As for that lens, it is manual focus only. Excellent build quality all metal. Zeiss lens tend to have great focus from center to edge of the photo, not to mental wonderful micro contrast and color. I rented the 21mm wide angle for a week. Its on my list of lenses to get.

 

[JMapleton]

Perhaps I would take time to master what you have before dropping a lot of money on good equipment. There is the rental route you can go with like lensrentals.com And for a crop frame I would look at a 35mm lens to get the equivalent 50mm of a full frame.

As for that lens, it is manual focus only. Excellent build quality all metal. Zeiss lens tend to have great focus from center to edge of the photo, not to mental wonderful micro contrast and color. I rented the 21mm wide angle for a week. Its on my list of lenses to get.

I found that website while searching, I didn't know if it was legit or not. Guess it is.

I might rent one to see what it's like.

I bought this camera just a few days ago, not knowing anything about cameras. I originally bought it for my telescope to do astrophotograhy. I just like good equipment and I know Zeiss is great.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

If you don't know what the difference will be you don't need to drop over $1k on a lens like that. The 18-55mm IS is very good for the price. If you want a large aperture prime lens, grab the Canon 50mm II f/1.8 for $100 and call it a day for a while. They have high resale value too ($80-$90) if you decide you want something better.

The 50/1.8 is a marginal lens. For the price it's very good, but realize that even the Canon 50/1.4 is a huge step up.

 

[996GT2]

I just bought a Canon T1i kit, which included the 18-55mm IS Zoom lens.

I'm looking at aftermarket lenses, particularly a Zeiss 50mm:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...Planar_ZE.html

What sort of difference in the image quality will I see with a lens like this? What things will be different? Smoothness of image? Sharpness? Color?

The Zeiss 50mm Makro-Planar is one of the sharpest lenses out there (and probably the sharpest "fast" 50mm lens in existence). Micro-contrast is excellent as well, like most Zeiss macro lenses. However, it is very expensive and manual-focus only. Manual focusing takes time to master, and the fact that you have a T1i (with a small viewfinder and darker pentamirror setup) will only make it harder.

Like others have said, I'd wait to master your skills before you shell out so much money for a 50mm lens. The Canon 50mm f/1.8 is quite sharp and very affordable...only $100. Plus, it has the benefit of autofocus, so you won't have to worry about missing out on shots because you couldn't manual focus quickly enough. Lots of people complain about the 50mm f/1.8's marginal AF performance, but I find that it's quite good if you use it correctly (i.e. using the center AF point on an area of high contrast). I would try out the 50mm f/1.8 to see how you like that focal length on your T1i, as 50mm has a field of view equivalent to 80mm on a full-frame camera. It's a great focal length for portraiture, but it may be a bit too long for general use.

 

[996GT2]

The 50/1.8 is a marginal lens. For the price it's very good, but realize that even the Canon 50/1.4 is a huge step up.

I disagree. I would say it's a small step up, if any at all. I've had 2 copies of the Canon 50mm f/1.8 and 2 copies of the Canon 50mm f/1.4, and I would say that both copies of the 50mm f/1.4 were not as sharp as the 50mm f/1.8 at comparable apertures. Wide-open, the 50mm f/1.8 was sharp even on full-frame (5D), and AF performance was quite decent. The f/1.4, on the other hand, didn't really AF much faster and wasn't as sharp. At f/1.4, the Canon 50mm showed a strong halation effect. Some would say that it's "dreamy," but I just found it unsharp. In my opinion, the worse sharpness of the Canon 1.4 is not forgivable considering that it costs 3x as much as the f/1.8.

Perhaps both copies of the Canon 50mm f/1.4 that I had were not the best, but I find it unacceptable to have multiple bad copies in an original manufacturer (Canon) lens. Plus, many people have reported that the AF motor on the Canon 50mm f/1.4s die after a couple of years due to an inherently flawed geartrain design.

Keep in mind that the 50mm f/1.4 still uses a traditional micro-motor for AF. It's marketed as "ultrasonic," but it does not have a true ring-type ultrasonic motor like the Canon 50mm f/1.2L or Sigma 50mm f/1.4 HSM.

The only areas in which the Canon 50mm f/1.4 beats the 1.8 are in build quality and bokeh rendition, but if good bokeh is what you're after then the Sigma 50 does much better for not much more money. And what good is having a well-built 50mm lens if it can't take sharp pictures wide open?

 

[slashbinslashbash]

Listen to 996GT2. Although I prefer my Canon 50/1.4 to the 50/1.8 I used to have, for multiple reasons. But I would not hesitate to recommend either one to you. The 50/1.8 is an incredible value. You could look at it as "all optics, no frills". Cheap AF motor, cheap plastic body and mount.... but the optics are incredible for $100. The 50/1.4 is a step up in all regards, but optically it's not 3.5x the performer of the 50/1.8.

If you want a fast 50mm, get the Canon 1.8 for ~$100 or the 1.4 for ~$350. Or the Sigma 1.4 for ~$500. And if you want to spend >$1000 on a 50mm prime, I would take the Canon 50mm f/1.2, even with its known issues, over the Zeiss.

But...if you just want a better lens than what you've got, get a Tamron 17-50 for $460 or the Canon 17-55 IS for $1060.

What we're all trying to tell you is... there are a LOT of good lenses out the for the Canon EF/EF-S mount. If you had a lot of experience and 6-7 other lenses and you wanted the Zeiss, I would say go for it. There are some things that the Zeiss has, that you simply can't get anywhere else. But for your first lens after the kit lens? No way. There are LOTS of ways to go. My recommendations, in somewhat ranked ordering:

Better/faster normal zoom (Tamron 17-50 or Canon 17-55)
Normal fast prime (Sigma 30mm f/1.4, Canon 28mm f/1.8)
Telephoto zoom (Canon 55-250 IS (your ONLY choice for <$500); more than $500, one of the Canon 70-200 L's, or the Sigma 70-200/2.8)
Wide-angle zoom (Canon 10-22, Sigma 8-16, Tamron 10-24, etc.)
Telephoto fast prime (Canon 50mm f/1.8 or f/1.4, Canon 85mm f/1.8)
Macro lens (100mm Macro)

The Zeiss is extremely pricey for what you get. Autofocus is awesome, and attempting manual focus through a tiny pentamirror Rebel viewfinder is not something to relish. f/2.0 is considered fast, but it is comparatively slow for a 50mm prime. There are a lot better bang-per-buck options out there.... and even some better "bang regardless of buck" options out there, given that this is your 2nd lens. Zeiss is very good. But Canon is very good too and IMO the best you can get for Canon bodies, all-around.

 

[yhelothar]

If you want an awesome 50mm manual focus, go for the SMC Takumar that was the Japanese Zeiss competitor of the day.
You get an old used early 70s one for about $50 on ebay. The thing is built like a swiss mechanical watch. Most seem to be in pretty good shape, and only have some cosmetic wear at most.

And yes, this would blow the thriftyfifty out of the water. Much improved resolution, and more importantly, contrast and saturation.

 

[jpeyton]

Get the Sigma 50/1.4 or the Canon 50/1.2L.

 

[JMapleton]

The Zeiss is extremely pricey for what you get. Autofocus is awesome, and attempting manual focus through a tiny pentamirror Rebel viewfinder is not something to relish. f/2.0 is considered fast, but it is comparatively slow for a 50mm prime. There are a lot better bang-per-buck options out there.... and even some better "bang regardless of buck" options out there, given that this is your 2nd lens. Zeiss is very good. But Canon is very good too and IMO the best you can get for Canon bodies, all-around.

I'm starting to learn away from the Zeiss now because I didn't know how hard it would be to do a manual focus.

But on the other hand, for me, it costs more to upgrade than it does to buy it right the first time. I don't like to upgrade. I didn't upgrade when I bought my telescope, I bought one of the best right off the bat and I'm happy with it.

What is the top of the line autofocus for Canon? Do they make a high end series?

 

[996GT2]

I'm starting to learn away from the Zeiss now because I didn't know how hard it would be to do a manual focus.

But on the other hand, for me, it costs more to upgrade than it does to buy it right the first time. I don't like to upgrade. I didn't upgrade when I bought my telescope, I bought one of the best right off the bat and I'm happy with it.

What is the top of the line autofocus for Canon? Do they make a high end series?

Lenses don't depreciate much if at all. If you get a cheaper lens now and need to upgrade later, you can get most of your original purchase price back when you sell the lens. Think of it as paying a $40-50 rental fee to have the lens for a few years.

The best AF 50mm for Canon is the 50mm f/1.2L, but I wouldn't recommend it on a T1i for many reasons. First, 50mm is too long (IMO) on a crop-sensor body, and the 50L has some serious issues with AF accuracy and focus shifting.

 

[Lemon law]

To Jmapleton,

May I suggest a different line of thinking given two considerations.

(1) While your current digital SLR is not the latest and the greatest, its still has enough megapixels to make lens quality a delimiter. As you can see there is a hot stove league debate of what 50 mm lens will give you the best lens quality, but unless said lens auto focuses and is compatible with your digital SLR, you LOSE some lens and camera functionality.

(2) The kit lens, an 18-55 MM may not be the best lens in the world, but its certainly no slouch either. But ask your self, why did you buy a digital SLR instead of some lighter and cheaper point and shoot camera? And that answer, at least for me, is to extend the capacities of your camera. In film 35mm camera equivalents with a C sized sensor, the 18-55 mm is a 28.8 to a 88mm lens. Too narrow to be a true wide angle, too short to be more than a mild telephoto. And in my line of thinking, if you are going to start adding lens to your camera bag of tricks, you should first start out buying prime lens of excellent optical quality that are outside the capacities of the 18-55 focal length range. For the sport photographer, it may well be something in the 125mm range, for the landscape guru, they want something in the 10 -15 mm range with some tilt capacity, as someone into bird photography, I have a 300 mm lens with dreams of later upgrading to L quality optics, and I joined the crowd who modded a 35-80mm lens into a macro lens.

 

[JMapleton]

Lenses don't depreciate much if at all. If you get a cheaper lens now and need to upgrade later, you can get most of your original purchase price back when you sell the lens. Think of it as paying a $40-50 rental fee to have the lens for a few years.

The best AF 50mm for Canon is the 50mm f/1.2L, but I wouldn't recommend it on a T1i for many reasons. First, 50mm is too long (IMO) on a crop-sensor body, and the 50L has some serious issues with AF accuracy and focus shifting.

Which high end autofocus lens would you recommend for the T1i?

My thing is I don't want to "upgrade." I want the best from the start.

 

[jpeyton]

My thing is I don't want to "upgrade." I want the best from the start.

Then why do you have a T1i?

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Which high end autofocus lens would you recommend for the T1i?

My thing is I don't want to "upgrade." I want the best from the start.

I'd recommend the Sigma 50/1.4 personally. It's creamy bokeh rivals that of the Canon 50/1.2. There are reports of focus shift, but nothing as severe as the 50/1.2.

Plus, Sigma's using a newer 50mm design. Canon and many other manufacturers have been using 50mm lens designs from the 80s or something... or earlier. The 50mm/1.8 is a good example of an ancient design.

also the 50mm focal length is a little tricky for beginners I admit. I hated my 50/1.8 at first, and switched to a 28/1.8. It's easy when you want to take group shots or get people at the dinner table, etc. The 50mm you have to learn to back up. But with a little practice, you learn to use those tighter crops well. It's exactly the same reason why you see so many full framers love the 85mm. Heck, many of the push for the 135mm lens even. You just gotta learn to use it well. It's not going to be the easiest where you just pick up the camera and expect everything to fit in your field of view. I'm starting to love the 50mm FL again. I just need to be sure that a 50mm prime is worth my money because I already shoot with the 17-55mm f/2.8 most of my time.

 

[JMapleton]

Then why do you have a T1i?

The purpose I use it for, I do not need anything better (so I'm told). I plan to use it for astrophotography through my high end refractor telescope.

But I'd also like to take normal photos and I would like to so as high quality as possible.

 

[JMapleton]

I'd recommend the Sigma 50/1.4 personally. It's creamy bokeh rivals that of the Canon 50/1.2. There are reports of focus shift, but nothing as severe as the 50/1.2.

Plus, Sigma's using a newer 50mm design. Canon and many other manufacturers have been using 50mm lens designs from the 80s or something... or earlier. The 50mm/1.8 is a good example of an ancient design.

also the 50mm focal length is a little tricky for beginners I admit. I hated my 50/1.8 at first, and switched to a 28/1.8. It's easy when you want to take group shots or get people at the dinner table, etc.

Thanks for the recommendation. I will look into this. I plan to take mostly landscape photos and outdoors photos. I'm not the guy who brings the camera to a party to take pics.

 

[996GT2]

Which high end autofocus lens would you recommend for the T1i?

My thing is I don't want to "upgrade." I want the best from the start.

Since you mentioned landscapes, I'll list a few good wide-angle lenses for the T1i.

Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, Canon 10-22mm, Sigma 8-16mm.

If you want a 50mm, then the Canon 50mm f/1.2L is the best one out there.

If you're looking for a telephoto zoom, the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS Mark II is excellent. You do pay for the superb optical performance, though, as the lens costs over $2000.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

I'm starting to learn away from the Zeiss now because I didn't know how hard it would be to do a manual focus.

But on the other hand, for me, it costs more to upgrade than it does to buy it right the first time. I don't like to upgrade. I didn't upgrade when I bought my telescope, I bought one of the best right off the bat and I'm happy with it.

What is the top of the line autofocus for Canon? Do they make a high end series?

Yes, anything that has a red "L" in the description and a red ring around the end of the barrel But the L lenses are mostly designed for full-frame bodies, not crops, so by using them on a crop body, you will be carrying around extra weight. But hey, many people do it.

Personally, if you want the best-of-the-best, never-have-to-upgrade lens that would be useful on your T1i, I would look very strongly at the Canon 35mm f/1.4L ($1370), the Canon 135mm f/2L ($1000), or the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II ($2300). Also the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS. It's not an L, but that's because of Canon's marketing decision never to make "L" lenses that are EF-S mount (i.e., that don't work on full-frame bodies). In almost all aspects, it is "L" quality.

I would particularly NOT recommend the 50mm f/1.2L or the 85mm f/1.2L -- both are weirdo, specialist lenses that I simply cannot recommend for a beginner. It will only end in frustration. If you want the 50mm or 85mm focal lengths, you can save a lot of money and frustration by getting the 50/1.4 (Canon or Sigma) and 85/1.8 (both $400 or less), both of which are much more manageable lenses.

I see it as kind of like the "I'm a beginner rider but I want to buy a supersport 600cc bike" debate that has raged in the Garage forum for the past few weeks. Photography is a hobby for most people. An enjoyable hobby. There is some pro-level gear that you can buy and start using right off the bat as a beginner, and it will help you take better photos regardless of your skill. But there are a few pieces of equipment that, while having their positives, also have limitations will really screw you up if you don't know what you're doing. And they could completely turn you off of the hobby if you spend all this money and don't get the results you want.

The 50L and 85L are both like that. The 50L has focus problems at certain f-stops, and you've got to know how to compensate and where the sweet spot of the lens is; and the 85L is super slow to focus. The 85L produces some of the most beautiful bokeh around, but it's pretty much strictly a portrait lens. The AF is super slow (because of the focus design -- the front elements move back and forth to focus, and the front elements are huge and weighty; other big lenses such as the super-telephotos focus using smaller, interior elements). Trying to use the 85L to take photos of, say, little kids running around the house, would be pretty rough. Sports with the 85L is out of the question, although its "on the face of things" specs (mild telephoto, extremely fast aperture) make it sound like it'd be perfect for indoor sports like basketball. But no, the 85/1.8 is much better there, because its AF is super fast. So again -- if you were a portrait photographer, the 85L would be a superb choice. For a somewhat general-purpose lens (as a 2nd lens almost certainly would be), it is a poor choice.

And again, 996GT2 is right, you lose only a bit of money buying and selling lenses, and if you buy used in the first place, you might lose little or nothing (often just PayPal and shipping fees). Check the used prices on the buy/sell forum at photography-on-the.net to see what the going prices are for used Canon lenses.

And, again. I wouldn't spend too much money until you've got some experience and know what you're doing. You sound like money isn't a problem, but seriously. Until you're comfortable spending 90% of your shooting time in full-Manual exposure mode, you won't have the knowledge to be able to even distinguish between some of the higher-end lenses. Buy a prime of some sort ($500 or less) and a constant-aperture zoom (such as the 17-55 f/2.8 IS).

And, as others have mentioned, your body will be in for an upgrade shortly if you spend much money on lenses. A 40D/50D/60D, 7D or 5D Mark II will be in order. I have debated this issue before and found it to be true. A full-frame body with cheaper, non-L primes will give better results than a crop body with L primes of equivalent focal length. Some examples below.

5D + 50mm f/1.4 > 50D + 35mm f/1.4L
5D + 85mm f/1.8 > 50D + 50mm f/1.2L

A full-frame body will provide tangible benefits with every lens you own (except for EF-S mount lenses, of course). A crop body simply wastes something like 60% of the image circle that an "L" or other full-frame lens creates.

 

[ivan2]

If you want an awesome 50mm manual focus, go for the SMC Takumar that was the Japanese Zeiss competitor of the day.
You get an old used early 70s one for about $50 on ebay. The thing is built like a swiss mechanical watch. Most seem to be in pretty good shape, and only have some cosmetic wear at most.

And yes, this would blow the thriftyfifty out of the water. Much improved resolution, and more importantly, contrast and saturation.

I agree with the Pantex SMC 50mm. They are the way to go manual for cheap. Got mine for 50 on ebay and not a flaw on the lens I can find.

However manual focus will be even more frustrating, because now the aperture blades are stuck at the position they are to set and you basically have to open them up, focus, close to them whichever aperture u like, then shoot.

 

[JMapleton]

Thanks for the recommendations.